It doesn't make any sense. I have read the Church's official statement, I have had my friends try to explain it to me, I have talked to priests, I have talked to a Bishop, and the Church's view on birth control doesn't make any sense. Now, the abortion pill, that tracks. The ban on that is in line with Catholic teaching, but condoms and other preventative measures, I don't think they follow suit.

The main argument against birth control is that the primary purpose of sex is procreation. Fine, let's go with that. If the true purpose of sex was solely procreation, then the Church's approval of Natural Family Planning, a way of planning when to have sex to avoid pregnancy, would be hypocritical. To this argument, I have most often heard, "Yes but sex isn't solely about procreation, it's about bringing the husband and wife closer together."

Okay, okay, let's go with that. Sex is about procreation and bringing the wife and husband closer together. If that's true, then that kind of punches a hole in the "birth control is wrong because sex is about procreation" thing. The next most common response I get to this is that "but Natural Family Planning leaves some opportunity for failure." Which is a fair statement, but according to the official church teaching, NFP has a failure rate of two percent while, for example, condoms have a failure rate of four percent. If the reason NFP birth control is allowed is because it allows some opportunity for failure, then something like condoms or other preventative measures should also be admitted due to their higher chances of failure.

Some people I've talked to claimed that the reason birth control was against Catholic teaching when compared to NFP is because NFP is natural, while birth control is a man-made device. Once again, it's technically true, but does that really seem like a proper reason to ban it? Ignoring the fact that I doubt our God has an opinion on marital aids if the concept of man-made devices being introduced into sex is the principal reason behind it, then there isn't much reason coitus interruptus or "pulling out" should also be against Church teaching. On that note, I refuse to believe that "pulling out" violates the spirit of the marital act, but purposefully timing the female body to avoid kids doesn't.

One of the last statements I tend to hear about contraception is that it can ruin the family and lessen the bonds between husband and wife. Personally speaking, the past arguments have some weight behind them, but this last one really seems to be grasping at straws. I've heard a plethora of reasons people have gotten divorce, and the reasons listed are usually money, children, illness, or religion. I've yet to see a couple divorced because they decided to use condoms or birth control.

60 years ago, Pope Paul VI commissioned a study on birth control with 58 bishops and cardinals in study including the Polish Bishop Karol Wojtyla, better known as Pope John Pall II. This study, "The Study of Problems of Population, Family, and Birth," deliberated for two years in league with scientists and theologians to determine that it was in line with Catholic teaching to allow birth control. However, Pope Paul VI backed down at the last minute to the outrage, and frank dismissal, of men, bishops, cardinals, and the faithful.

If the Church is going to take a stance on something as controversial, debatable, and eroding to its authority as birth control, then they need to have a clear, concise, and reasonable stance against it.